Degree of Tiredness

[daves]

100% is fully rested, but what is the other levels of tiredness?

70-99% slightly tired?
40-69% tired?
1 - 39 exhausted?

I am not sure what % represents what degree of tiredness?

[MikeS369]

I'm not sure. Does tiredness have any effect on play or does tiredness only increase risk of injury?

[Pelican]

Fatigue can affect both risk of injury and quality of play; but those outcomes are random. I like a deep bench and rest players when they are less than 100%. For most or many players, one day off is enough. Or imitate clever managers, and give the tired guy a day off before or after a scheduled off day (if your generated schedule has them). The labels appear within the player profile, but I would not rely on the subjective characterization. If a guy is less than 100%, think about resting him. That fatigue level will only increase, whereas a day off should fix it. Below 50%, whatever you call it, performance will likely be affected, and injury risk is unacceptable. And that goes double for pitchers. Starter need to be 100%. Relievers can be used at less than that, but not many pitches or many hitters. You can always use a mound visit to check. They will tell you when they are gassed.

[Syd Thrift]

IME for pitchers fatigue affects their three true outcomes; that is, their ability to get strikeouts and avoid walks and homeruns. If you are playing in an environment where those things are very low, pitcher fatigue means a lot less. On an extreme level, if you’re doing 19th century play, you can essentially leave your starter in forever without ever worrying about fatigue (and if you’re using an as-played schedule, you’ll only play like 2 or 3 games a week in the 70s and well into the 80s), but even if you’re in, say, the 70s you can have a guy get a lucky BABIP run and last 200 pitches.

The other thing I should note is that every now and then you’ll see a post on Reddit or somewhere where a player played like 150 games with a .120 BA or something. That’s not due to the player playing fatigued! It’s due to the player being played through an injury that affects their batting, usually because the team doesn’t have any kind of a backup at that position.

[MathBandit]

Originally Posted by Syd Thrift

The other thing I should note is that every now and then you’ll see a post on Reddit or somewhere where a player played like 150 games with a .120 BA or something. That’s not due to the player playing fatigued! It’s due to the player being played through an injury that affects their batting, usually because the team doesn’t have any kind of a backup at that position.

I always find it hilarious that Reddit seems to think that a total of about 2 or 3 days off over 6 months is the difference between a guy having a 95 wRC+ and a 25 wRC+, when people say that the SS played 160 games so was gassed the whole year (when playing 155+ games is very normal in both RL and OOTP for star players who avoid injury).

[zevus]

Originally Posted by MathBandit

I always find it hilarious that Reddit seems to think that a total of about 2 or 3 days off over 6 months is the difference between a guy having a 95 wRC+ and a 25 wRC+, when people say that the SS played 160 games so was gassed the whole year (when playing 155+ games is very normal in both RL and OOTP for star players who avoid injury).

shortstops playing 155+ games in ootp? sure, if you want to play them below 50% for some 15'ish games or so (or more like 30-40, I guess, as they'd not be getting benched enough). not saying it's an accurate depiction of 'fatigue', but shortstops are the next tier after catchers

[Syd Thrift]

I see shortstops play 150+ easily in the 1970s, when they had some crazy, 32 games in a month type schedules. YMMV I guess.

[MathBandit]

Originally Posted by zevus

shortstops playing 155+ games in ootp? sure, if you want to play them below 50% for some 15'ish games or so (or more like 30-40, I guess, as they'd not be getting benched enough). not saying it's an accurate depiction of 'fatigue', but shortstops are the next tier after catchers

Yes, absolutely. I just pulled up my most recent offline save and my SS played 149 games despite having two 5-day DtD injuries (where I didn't play him). And that's with manually managing rest on a daily basis for every player, and almost never playing him (or anyone else) in the Yellow, except rarely if it's one day before an off-day and my sub is either worn out or banged up.

[uruguru]

Originally Posted by zevus

shortstops playing 155+ games in ootp? sure, if you want to play them below 50% for some 15'ish games or so (or more like 30-40, I guess, as they'd not be getting benched enough). not saying it's an accurate depiction of 'fatigue', but shortstops are the next tier after catchers

Johnny Bench played 160 games in 1974, 137 at catcher, and had one of the best offensive seasons of his career. That is impossible under the OOTP fatigue model.

[chriskelly]

what about 2 way players? if he's tired from pitching, does it have any impact on him hitting? I would think not

[oldfatbaldguy]

Originally Posted by Pelican

I like a deep bench and rest players when they are less than 100%.

I used to do it that way, but I believe the fatigue system changed in OOTP22. Before that, in my experience, a position player who wasn't at 100% would be "tired" the next day if not rested. Now they creep down through the 90s in baby steps (except catchers, who drop quickly). Now I don't rest them until they drop below 90%.

[Pelican]

Originally Posted by oldfatbaldguy

I used to do it that way, but I believe the fatigue system changed in OOTP22. Before that, in my experience, a position player who wasn't at 100% would be "tired" the next day if not rested. Now they creep down through the 90s in baby steps (except catchers, who drop quickly). Now I don't rest them until they drop below 90%.

I’ve noticed the same thing. And the “baby steps” don’t seem to markedly affect performance. My worry is that a guy whose fatigue has crept down might need more than a day off to have it creep back up to 100%. I haven’t tested that, but I will. Say, let a guy creep down to 70%, day of rest, see if he is at 100%. If not, how long does it take? Does it vary between/among players, depending upon endurance and stamina rating?

The other curiosity is DTD injuries and their effect (if any) on performance, and how (if) they intersect with fatigue. I have a guy in AAA who is absolutely raking, despite having been listed with a DTD injury for nearly a month. I did try resting him, for one day, and it did not affect the injury status. His fatigue rating is 100% through all of this. I would like to bring him up to MLB when rosters expand September 1, but it seems risky and unfair to have him debut while still DTD. The DTD injury is unfortunately not specified, so I can’t use any medical knowledge to figure this out. Thoughts on that?

[oldfatbaldguy]

Originally Posted by Pelican

Say, let a guy creep down to 70%, day of rest, see if he is at 100%. If not, how long does it take? Does it vary between/among players, depending upon endurance and stamina rating?

I can't answer all of these questions, but I find position players still usually get back to 100% with one day off. When they hit yellow it's usually not as low as 70%, except catchers. Catchers still mostly recover with one day off. I would guess it varies depending on the player's ratings, and also trainers have a "Fatigue Recovery" rating.

Another thing I believe has changed is that it seems you can get away with a brief appearance in the field by a guy on his "day off" -- one inning, maybe? It used to be that they could pinch hit, and if they got on they could run the bases, but if they played a position you'd end up resting them for another day. (In practice, of course, if you put a guy who is resting in the field, the game will go 15 innings.)

I handle day-to-day injuries on a case-by-case basis. If I know the team isn't going to contend this season, I generally don't have guys play hurt at all. If a guy is a lot better than the guy who would replace him, I'm more likely to play him than if he isn't. My catcher currently has a "sore ankle," and it doesn't seem to matter much.

Something I've always wondered is whether the type of injury matters. A sore ankle doesn't seem worrisome. A pulled muscle seems like something that could get much worse if a guy tries to play through it.

I am still playing OOTP22, btw. I don't know if things changed again in 23.